1
A Generic Fuel Cell Model for the Simulation of
Fuel Cell Power Systems
Souleman Njoya M., Olivier Tremblay, Member IEEE, and Louis-A. Dessaint, Senior Member IEEE
Electrical Engineering Department, Ecole de Technologie Superieure
Abstract— This paper presents a novel approach to fuel cell
modeling. The model is developed with the objective to facilitate
the simulation of fuel cell power systems and requires only few
variables from manufacturer datasheets. The user would need
to extract data from the datasheet in order to perform the
simulation and does not need to perform experimental tests on
a real stack. Based on the amount of information available on
a given stack, a simplified model or, alternatively, the detailed
model can be used. These models are generic models and
able to emulate the behavior of any fuel cell types fed with
hydrogen and air. The procedure to extract data from fuel cells
datasheet is described along with the method to approximate
cell’s parameters. The models are validated through comparison
with real datasheet performance and with experimental data from
an actual fuel cell stack. The simulations results obtained are
close to the expected results with an error in the range of ± 1%,
that for both steady and transient states and at any condition of
operation, provided a controlled stack internal humidity. Finally,
the models are included in SimPowerSystems (SPS) and used in
the simulation of a Fuel Cell Backup Power System (FCBPS). The
FCBPS is used as a rescue to a three-phase to ground fault on a
25 kV system feeding an asynchronous motor. The performance
obtained from the FCPBS model is as expected, the fault is totally
unseen by the connected load.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Over the last decade, there have been some growing con-
cerns regarding the emission of greenhouse gases and the
shrinking of fossil fuel reserves which have made fuel cell
energy sources very attractive. This is mainly due to their high
reliability, low emission of pollutants and little maintenance
[1].
Fuel cells are electrochemical devices that convert chemical
energy from an electrolytic reaction directly to electrical
energy, rejecting only heat and water. In spite of being a
clean source of energy, they are only capable of producing
unregulated dc voltage, hence the need for power converters
to interface the driven load. An accurate model of fuel cells is
needed to observe their dynamic and steady state performances
necessary for the design, control and simulation of such
converters.
Several types of fuel cells models have been reported in the
literature. These models can be classified into three categories
which are: chemical, experimental and electrical. The chem-
ical models include complex chemical and thermodynamic
Souleman Njoya M., O. Tremblay and L.-A. Dessaint are members of
the Groupe de Recherche en Electronique de Puissance et Commande In-
dustrielle (GREPCI), Ecole de technologie superieure, Universite du Que-
bec, Montreal, QC H3C 1K3, Canada (e-mail: souleman motapon@yahoo.fr;
olivier.tremblay.1@ens.etsmtl.ca; dessaint@ele.etsmtl.ca).
978-1-4244-4241-6/09/$25.00 ©2009 IEEE
phenomenon such as the mass transport, heat transfer and
diffusion of species inside the cell [2],[3],[4]. These models
require excessive amount of parameters and can not be easily
added to electrical simulations programs. The experimental
models are derived from experiments and they represent the
fuel cell by look-up tables or empirical expressions [5],[6].
These models do not include fuel cell thermodynamics and can
not represent the effect of operating parameters such as gases
inlet pressures, flow rates, compositions and temperature. The
electrical models represent the fuel cell by electrical circuit
elements [8],[7]. They do not include fuel cell thermodynamics
also but are more suitable for the simulation of fuel cell
power systems. In all approaches of modeling, the model
parameters are obtained either empirically or by performing
some tests on the real fuel cell. The polarization curves tests
are required for chemical and experimental models whereas
the current interrupt, impedance spectroscopy and frequency
response tests are required for electrical models.
In this paper, a new approach of fuel cell modeling is
proposed, an approach where the fuel cell model is obtained
from data from fuel cells datasheets which are provided by
stack manufacturers and publicly available. The model is a
generic model and combines the features of chemical and
electrical models. That is, the model is suitable for electrical
simulation programs and can represent the effect of operating
parameters on the fuel cell. The paper is divided into three
sections. In the first section, the proposed model and its
parameters are described. Furthermore, a method is presented
to show how to determine the model parameters from the
manufacturer’s datasheet. In the second section, the model is
validated with a typical datasheet curve and with experimental
results from a real fuel cell. The third section contains an
example of an application where the fuel cell model integrated
in SimPowerSystems (SPS) is used in the simulation of a fuel
cell backup power System. The paper ends with a conclusion.
II. T HE FUEL CELL MODEL
Two models of a fuel cell stack (several cell in series) are
proposed: a simplified model and a detailed model. These
models are described in the following lines.
A. The simplified model
The simplified model represents a fuel cell stack by a
controlled voltage source in series with a constant resistance
as shown in Fig. 1.
 2

Fig. 1. Simplified fuel cell stack model

The controlled voltage source (E) is described by equation

(1):
 
if c 1
E = Eoc − N Aln · (1) Fig. 2. Detailed fuel cell stack model
i0 sTd /3 + 1
Vf c = E − Rohm · if c (2)
circuit voltage (Eoc ). The equivalent circuit of the detailed
where
model (shown in Fig. 2 ) is the same as for the simplified
Eoc = open circuit voltage (V) one, except that the parameters (Eoc , i0 , A) will have to be
N = number of cells updated based on the input pressures and flow rates, stack
A = Tafel slope (V) temperature and gases compositions.
i0 = exchange current (A) Eoc , i0 and A are modified as follows [3], [7]:
Td = the response time (at 95% of the final value) (sec)
Rohm = internal resistance (Ω) Eoc = Kc · En (3)
if c = fuel cell current (A)
Vf c = fuel cell voltage (V) zF k(PH2 + PO2 ) −ΔG
i0 = · exp( ) (4)
Rh RT
Equation (1) is derived from [7] (equation 3.4) and repre- RT
A= (5)
sents the stack voltage considering only the activation losses zαF
(losses due to the slowness of chemical reactions at electrode’s where
surfaces). In [7], these losses are modeled electrically by a
R = 8.3145 J/(mol K)
parallel RC branch. Therefore, in a sudden change in stack
F = 96485 A s/mol
current, the fuel cell voltage will exhibit a delay which is
z = number of moving electrons (z = 2)
approximately 3 times the time constant (τ = RC) prior to
En = Nernst voltage (V)
equilibrium. This phenomenon is represented in equation (1)
α = charge transfer coefficient
by delaying
 the activation
 losses with a first order transfer
1
PH2 = partial pressure of hydrogen inside the stack (atm)
function sTd /3+1 with Td being the stack settling time. PO2 = partial pressure of oxygen inside the stack (atm)
Equation (2) gives the stack total voltage considering the k = Boltzmann’s constant (1.38×10−23 J/K)
losses due to electrodes and electrolyte resistances (ohmic h = Planck’s constant (6.626×10−34 J s)
losses). ΔG = activation energy barrier (J)
The simplified model can be used to simulate fuel cell stacks T = temperature of operation (K)
operating at nominal condition of temperature and pressure. A Kc = voltage constant at nominal condition of operation
diode is used to prevent the flow of negative current into the
stack. The model is implemented in SPS exactly as in Fig.
As shown in Fig. 2, new values of Eoc , i0 and A are calculated
1 using a controlled voltage and a 1us delay to break the
using Block A, B and C. At first, the rates of conversion
algebraic loop.
(utilizations) of hydrogen (U fH2 ) and oxygen (U fO2 ) are
determined in Block A as follows:
B. The detailed model
60000RT if c
The detailed model represents a particular fuel cell stack U fH2 = (6)
zF Pf uel Vf uel x%
when the parameters such as pressures, temperature, composi-
tions and flow rates of fuel and air vary. These variations affect 60000RT if c
U fO2 = (7)
the Tafel slope (A), the exchange current (i0 ) and the open 2zF Pair Vair y%
 3

where 1) Model assumptions:

Pf uel = absolute supply pressure of fuel (atm) • The gases are ideal.
Pair = absolute supply pressure of air (atm) • The stack is fed with hydrogen and air.
Vf uel = fuel flow rate (l/min) • The stack is equipped with a cooling system which
Vair = air flow rate (l/min) maintains the temperature at the cathode and anode exits
x = percentage of hydrogen in the fuel (%) stable and equal to the stack temperature.
y = percentage of oxygen in the oxidant (%) • The stack is equipped with a water management system
to maintain the humidity inside the cell at appropriate
level at any load.
The partial pressures and the Nernst voltage are determined in • Pressures drops across flow channels are negligible.
Block B as follows: • The cell voltage drops are due to reaction kinetics and
charge transport as most fuel cells do not operate in the
PH2 = (1 − U fH2 )x%Pf uel (8) mass transport region.
• The cell resistance is constant at any condition of opera-
tion.
PO2 = (1 − U fO2 )y%Pair (9)
2) Model limitations:
• The flow of gases or water through the membrane is not
PH2 O = (w + 2y%U fO2 )Pair (10)
taken into account.
• The effect of temperature and humidity of the membrane
and on the stack resistance is not considered.
−44.43 RT  1

En = 1.229 + (T − 298) · + ln PH2 PO22 (11)
zF zF C. Data extraction and model parameters approximation
For T > 373K, Fuel cell manufacturers provide specifications1 of their
⎛ 1
⎞ stacks which include the polarization curve, rated and peak
−44.43 RT ⎝ PH2 PO22 ⎠ power, number of cell, efficiency, temperature, inlet pressures,
En = 1.229+(T −298)· + ln (12) etc. These data are used to obtain the models parameters.
zF zF PH2 O

1) Data required from datasheet: For the simplified model,

where
PH2 O = partial pressure of water vapor (atm)
w = percentage of water vapor in the oxidant (%)
Knowing the partial pressures of gases and the Nernst voltage,
the new values of the open circuit voltage and the exchange
current can therefore be calculated using equation (3) and (4)
respectively. Block C calculates the new value of the Tafel
slope using equation (5).
four parameters (Eoc , i0 , NA and Rohm ) are to be determined,
which requires at least four simultaneous equations. Two
points from each region (activation and ohmic) are taken on the
polarization curve as shown in Fig. 3. These points correspond
to the following:
• Current and voltage at nominal operating point: (Inom ,
Vnom )
• Current and voltage at maximum operating point: (Imax ,
Vmin )
• Voltage at 0 and 1 A: (Eoc , V1 )

For the detailed model, in addition to (Eoc , i0 , NA and Rohm ),

The effect of oxygen depletion (due to the air compressor
delay) on the stack voltage can be modeled if the parameters
for flow dynamics such as the peak utilization (U fO2 (peak) )
and the corresponding voltage undershoot (Vu ) are known.
The lack of oxygen inside the cell causes its utilization to
increase above the nominal value and the Nernst voltage will
be modified as follows:
En = En − K(U fO2 − U fO2 nom ) (13)
where
K = voltage undershoot constant
U fO2 nom = nominal oxygen utilization (%)
The proposed model is based on specific assumptions and
has limitations:
four more parameters (α, ΔG, K, Kc ) are to be determined.
Therefore, in addition to the four points on the polarization
curve, the following variables are needed:
• Number of cells in series (N)
• Nominal LHV stack efficiency (ηnom ) in %
• Nominal operating temperature (Tnom ) in C
o
• Nominal air flow rate (Vair(nom) ) in liter/min
• Absolute supply pressures (Pf uel(nom) , Pair(nom) ) in atm
• Nominal composition of fuel and air (xnom , ynom , wnom )
in %
To represent accurately the fuel cell dynamics, current step
and interrupt tests must be made on a real stack. Fig. 4
shows the stack response from these tests and the required
parameters (Td , U fO2 (peak) and Vu ). The response time (Td )
1 The specifications are usualy given at nominal condition of operation.
 4

TABLE I
F UEL CELL PARAMETERS

Fig. 3. Typical polarization curve

 
Inom
Vnom = Eoc − N Aln − Rohm Inom (15)
i0
 
Imax
Vmin = Eoc − N Aln − Rohm Imax (16)
i0
This gives:
(V1 − Vnom )(Imax − 1) − (V1 − Vmin )(Inom − 1)
NA =
ln(Inom )(Imax − 1) − ln(Imax )(Inom − 1)
(17)
Fig. 4. Fuel cell dynamics V1 − Vnom − N Aln(Inom )
Rohm = (18)
Inom − 1
 
depends on the fuel cell stack itself and is usually given on V1 − Eoc + Rohm
the datasheet. The parameters for flow dynamics (U fO2 (peak) i0 = exp (19)
NA
and Vu ) depend on the dynamics of external equipments
(compressor, regulator and loads) and they are not provided by
manufacturers as their values vary with the user application. The remaining parameters (for the detailed model only) are
For simulation, the user may assume values of U fO2 (peak) determined using the set of equations shown in Table I
between 60-70 %2 and Vu between 2-5 % of the stack nominal
voltage.
III. T HE MODEL VALIDATION
2) Model parameters approximation: From equations (1)
The proposed models are first validated at steady state,
and (2), we have at steady state, the following of equations:
nominal condition of operation using a typical datasheet
polarization curve. As most manufacturers does not provide
V1 = Eoc − N Aln(i0 ) − Rohm (14)
the stack performance at different condition of operations,
2 fuel cells usually operate with 50 % oxygen utilization at nominal several tests are performed on a real stack to ascertain the
condition. validity of the detailed model.

Fig. 5. Simulations and datasheet results
A. Validation at steady state, nominal condition of operation
A model of a 6kW-45V, PEMFC stack (the NedStack PS63 )
from NedStack is made using its datasheet. The following
variables are extracted (as described in section II-C) from the
datasheet:
• Voltage at 0 A and 1 A [Eoc , V1 ] = [65, 63]
• Nominal operating point [Inom , Vnom ] = [133.3, 45]
• Maximum operating point [ Imax , Vmin ] = [225, 37]
• Nominal stack efficiency (ηnom ) = 55 %
• Number of cells in series (N) = 65
• Operating temperature = 65 C
o
• Nominal air flow rate (Vair (nom)) = 297 liter/min
• Nominal composition of fuel and air [xnom , ynom , wnom ]
= [99.999, 21, 1]
• Nominal supply pressure [H2 , Air] = [1.5 1]
The polarization curves obtained in steady state from both
models are superimposed on the datasheet curve as shown in
Fig. 5. The dotted line shows the simulated curve whereas the
solid line is the real curve from datasheet. It is observed that
the simulated curve matches exactly the real one in the ohmic
region. A difference is observed in the activation region due
to the non-linearity of the activation voltage (more points are
needed at low current to determine a better value of i0 and α).
The same result will be obtained for any type of fuel cells as
they all have similar polarization curves. The level of accuracy
of the model depends on the precision of data provided by the
user.
B. Validation at different condition of operation
A 500W-48V fuel cell stack (EPAC-500) from Hpower is
used to observe the stack behavior when gas pressures and
temperature change. As the stacks datasheet is not available, a
performance test at a given condition of operation is required
to obtain data such as the polarization curve, efficiency, stack
response time etc., which will be used to determine the
parameters of the model. The following data are deduced from
test results for model parameters determination:
• (Inom , Vnom ) = (8.128, 50.28)
3 The datasheet can be found at http://www.nedstack.com/docs/ps6.pdf.
5
Fig. 6. Simulation results at Pair = 25 kPa, PH2 = 35 kPa, T = 42.3 o C
• (Imax , Vmin ) = (14.155, 45.707)
• (Eoc , V1 ) = (65.7, 58.4)
• N = 65
• ηnom = 58.83 %
• Tnom = 42.3 o C
• Vair(nom) = 14.91 liter/min
• (Pf uel(nom) , Pair(nom) ) = (1.35, 1.25)
• (xnom , ynom , wnom ) = (99.95, 21, 1)
The dynamics tests give: (Td , U fO2 (peak) , Vu ) = (1, 67, 2.5).
Fig. 6 shows the simulation and test results (at nominal con-
dition) along with the percentage error between the simulated
and the real output voltage. It can be observed from Fig. 6 that
in the activation region, the steady state error is within ± 1%
at normal operation whereas the transient and startup errors
are within ± 3% . In the ohmic region, the error reduces to
less than ± 0.5% for both transient and steady state conditions.
This shows that the stack behavior is well represented by the
model. The large error at startup is mainly due to the residues
of hydrogen and oxygen inside the stack at the beginning of
the experiment. This makes the real reactant utilizations much
greater than the simulated utilizations.
The performance of the model is tested when parameters
such as inlet pressure and stack temperature vary. Fig. 7, 8, 9,
10, 12 and 13 show the simulation and test results obtained at
different conditions of operations.
It can be noted that when the pressure or the stack tem-
perature increases, the percentage error in the ohmic region is
affected. It increases with pressure (less than ± 0.5% at Pair
= 15 kPa, closed to 1% at Pair = 25 kPa and closed to 2%
at Pair = 35 kPa) and reduces with temperature (around 4%
at 35 o C and 39 o C, less than 1% 46 o C). This is due to the
fact that the stack resistance is assumed to be constant in the
model. In reality, when the air pressure increases or the stack
temperature decreases, the relative humidity inside the stack
increases, that means cell’s membrane gets more humid. This
increases the membrane conductivity and therefore the stack
 6

Fig. 7. Simulation results at Pair = 15 kPa, PH2 = 15 kPa, T = 42 o C Fig. 9. Simulation results at Pair = 35 kPa, PH2 = 33 kPa, T = 42 o C

Fig. 10. Simulation results at Pair = 35 kPa, PH2 = 35 kPa, T = 35 o C

Fig. 8. Simulation results at Pair = 25 kPa, PH2 = 23.5 kPa, T = 42 o C

IV. S IMULATION OF A FUEL CELL BACKUP POWER SYSTEM

resistance decreases. The models are integrated in SPS and used in a simulation
of a fuel cell backup power system (FCBPS). As shown in Fig.
For Pair = 15 kPa and T = 46 C, the humidity inside the
o
11, the FCBPS model is added to a plan consisting of a 100
cell is lower or close to its value at nominal condition (nominal
HP, 460 V asynchronous motor fed from a 25 kV distribution
humidity). This means the resistance doesn’t vary much and
network through a 200 kVA, 25/0.6 kV Wye-Delta transformer.
therefore the error is very low.
The FCBPS (shown in Fig. 14) consists of the following:
From the above results, it can be stated that the effect of
• A fuel cell stack: is a 400 cells, 288 Vdc, 100 kW Proton
pressure and temperature on the stack performance is well
Exchange Membrane (PEM) fuel cell stack.
represented by the model. If the level of humidity is controlled,
• An ultra capacitor: A 600 V, 2F with power output of
then the error between the simulated voltage and the real
100 kW maximum
voltage will be within ± 1%. However, the model gives an
• The DC/DC converter: is a 600 Vdc average value boost
error of 1% for every 9% increase in air pressure and an error
converter with a voltage regulator
of 3% for a 15% decrease in temperature due to the effect of
• A diode bridge rectifier and a PWM inverter
humidity.
 7

Fig. 11. FCBPS simulation model

Fig. 14. Fuel cell backup power system

Fig. 12. Simulation results at Pair = 35 kPa, PH2 = 35 kPa, T = 39 o C

A. Simulations results and stack performance

The FCBPS is simulated over 5 s with a three-phase to
ground fault occurring at 0.8 s on the 25 kV network. Fig. 15
and 16 show the simulation results.
The following lines explain what is going on during the
simulation:
• At t = 0 s, the motor is fed at no load from the 25/0.6
kV transformer. The fuel cell starts and charges the ultra
capacitor in less than 0.1 s.
• At t = 0.2 s, a load of 311 N.m is applied to the motor.
The motor is only supplied by the 25 kV network and the
fuel cell can not operate as the dc-link voltage is higher
than the fuel cell DC-DC converter output.
• At t = 0.8 s, a three-phase to ground fault occurs and
the breaker opens at 0.9 s. The fuel cell can not act
instantaneously due to flow dynamics. Therefore the ultra
capacitor discharges and provides the total power. The
Fig. 13. Simulation results at Pair = 35 kPa, PH2 = 35 kPa, T = 46 o C
motor continue to operate without any concern.

Fig. 15. Simulation results, a three-phase to ground fault occurs at 0.8 s
• From t = 1.42 s, the fuel cell starts producing the required
power. The ultra capacitor is also charged with the fuel
cell excess power.
It can be noted from this result that the DC-link voltage is
well controlled by fuel cell DC-DC converter. The converter
output is well maintained below 600 V (before 0.8 s) to allow
only the 25 kV network power to flow to the motor. This
FCBPS model shows how the fuel cell can be connected in a
power system and used effectively in emergency situations.
V. C ONCLUSION
Fuel cells are becoming more and more involved in ve-
hicular, portable and stationary power generation systems.
The design and simulation of these systems require a simple
and realistic fuel cell model necessary for dimensioning the
fuel cell power source and associated converters. This paper
proposes a fuel cell model which is generic and able to
represent the behavior of most fuel cells fed with hydrogen and
air. The model requires only few variables from manufacturer’s
datasheets and the simulation can be performed without the
real fuel cell at hands. The proposed model is validated with
a typical datasheet curve and with experimental results from
a real stack. The error between the real stack voltage and
the simulated voltage is within ± 1% if the humidity level
8
Fig. 16. Fuel cell and ultra capacitor performances
inside the stack is controlled. However, the model gives an
error of 1% for every 9% increase in air pressure and an error
of 3% for a 15% decrease in temperature due to the effect
of humidity. This model is integrated in SimPowerSystems
(SPS) and used in the simulation of a Fuel Cell Backup
Power System (FCBPS). The performance obtained from the
FCPBS model is as expected, the fault is totally unseen by
the connected load. The FCPBS model shows how the fuel
cell stack model is used with other electrical systems models
and can be used as a perfect starting point in the design and
simulation of fuel cell power systems.
R EFERENCES
[1] Kong Xin, Ashwin M. Khambadkone, “Dynamic modelling of fuel cell
with power electronic, current and performance analysis,” IEEE Trans.
on Power Electronics and Drive Systems, 2003. PEDS 2003. The Fifth
International Conference, Volume 1, 17-20 Nov. 2003 Page(s): 607 - 612.
[2] Liu. Hongtan, Tianhong Zhou, “CFD based PEM fuel cell models and
applications,” Nanotech 2003, vol 3, Page(s): 463- 466.
[3] Ryan OHayre, Suk-Won Cha,Witney Colella, Fritz B. Prinz “Fuel cell
fundamentals,” John Wiley and Sons, New York.
[4] Yu Qiuli, Anurag K. Srivastava, Song-Yul Choe, Wenzhong Gao, “Im-
proved modeling and control of a PEM fuel cell power system for
vehicles,” SoutheastCon, 2006. Proceedings of the IEEE, March 31 -
April 2, 2006 Page(s): 331 - 336.
[5] Min Joong Kim, Huei Peng, Chan-Chiao Lin, Euthie Stamos, Doanh Tran
“Testing, modeling, and control of a fuel cell hybrid vehicle,” 2005
American Control Conference, Portland, OR, USA.
[6] Prabha Acharya, Prasad Enjeti, Ira J. Pitel “An advanced fuel cell
simulator,” Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition, 2004.
APEC ’04. Nineteenth Annual IEEE, Volume 3, 2004 Page(s): 1554 -
1558.
[7] James Larminie, Andrew Dicks, “Fuel cell systems explained,” 2nd ed.
John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
[8] K. J. Runtz, M. D. Lyster “Fuel cell equivalent circuit models for
passive mode testing and dynamic mode design,” Electrical and Computer
Engineering, 2005. Canadian Conference on 1-4 May 2005 Page(s): 794
- 797.